NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS TO THE ADDRESSES. NOTE I. THE ESTABLISHMENT MAY BE IN DANGER, WHILE THE DYMOND. "Ir has frequently been said that the church is in danger.' What is meant by the church? or what is it that is in danger? Is it meant that the Episcopal form of church government is endangered—that some religious revolution is likely to take place, by which a Christian community shall be precluded from adopting that internal constitution which it thinks best? This surely cannot be feared. The day is gone by, in England at least, when the abolition of prelacy could become a measure of state. One community has its conference, and another its annual assembly, and another its independency, without any molestation. Who then would molest the English Church, because it prefers the government of bishops to any other? Is it meant that the doctrines of the church are endangered, or that its liturgy will be prohibited? Surely no. Whilst every other church is allowed to preach what doctrine it pleases, and to use what formularies it pleases, the liberty will surely not be denied to the Episcopal church. If the doctrines and government of that church be Christian and true, there is no reason to fear for their stability. Its members have superabundant ability to defend the truth. What then is it that is endangered? Of what are those who complain of danger, afraid? Is it meant that its civil immunities are endangered,—that its revenues are endangered? Is it meant that its members will hereafter have to support their ministers, without assistance from other churches? Is it feared that there will cease to be such things, as rich deaconries and bishoprics? Is it feared that the members of other churches will become eligible to the legislature, and that the heads of this church will not be temporal peers? In brief, Is it feared that this church will become merely one amongst the many, with no privileges but such as are common to good citizens and to good Christians? These surely are the things, of which they are afraid. It is not for religious truth, but for civil immunities; it is not for forms of church government, but for political pre-eminence: it is not for the church, but for the church establishment. Let a man, then, when he joins in the exclamation, the church is in danger,' present to his mind distinct ideas of his meaning, and of the object of his fears. If his alarm and his sorrow are occasioned not for religion but for politics-not for the purity and usefulness of the church, but for its immunities-not for the offices of its ministers, but for their splendour-let him be at peace. There is nothing in all this for which the Christian needs to be in sorrow or in fear. "And why? Because all that constitutes a church, as a Christian community, may remain when these things are swept away. There may be prelates, without nobility; there may be deans and archdeacons, without benefices and patronage; there may be pastors, without a legal provision; there may be a liturgy, without a test. "In the sense in which it is manifest that the phrase the church is in danger,' is ordinarily to be understood, that is, the Establishment is in danger-the fears are undoubtedly well-founded: the danger is real and imminent. It may not be immediate, perhaps; perhaps it may not be near at hand; but it is real, imminent, inevitable. The Establishment is indeed in danger; and I believe that no advocacy, however zealous, that no support, however determined, that no power, however great, will preserve it from destruction. If the declarations which have been cited in this chapter be true, if the reasonings which have been offered in this and in the last be just, who is the man that, as a Christian, regrets its danger, or would delay its fall? He may wish to delay it as a politician; he may regret it as an expectant of temporal advantage, but as a Christian he will rejoice. "Supposing the doctrines and government of the Church to be sound, it is probable, that its stability would be increased, by what is called its destruction. It would then only be detached, from that alliance with the state, which encumbers it, and weighs it down, and despoils its beauty, and obscures its brightness. Contention for this alliance will eventually be found to illustrate the proposition, that a man's greatest enemies are those of his own household. He is the practical enemy of the church, who endeavours the continuance of its connexion with the state: except, indeed, that the more zealous the endeavour, the more quickly, it is probable, the connexion will be dissolved; and, therefore, though such persons' mean not so, neither do their hearts think so,' yet they may be thus the agents, in the hand of God, of hastening the day, in which she shall be purified from every evil thing; in which she shall arise and shine because her light is come, and because the glory of the Lord is risen upon her.'"-Dymond's Essays, Essay iii. Chap. 15. vol. ii. pp. 329–332. NOTE II. ACT FOR ESTABLISHING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, PASSED IN THE ASSEMBLY OF VIRGINIA, IN THE BEGINNING OF THE YEAR 1786. The object of Voluntary Church Associations, is just to bring this country into the same situation, in which some of the United States of America have, with great advantage to all interests, civil and religious, been placed for more than half a century. The following Acr of the General Assembly of Virginia, contains a very clear and condensed view of the reasons against civil establishments of religion. Few superior legal documents are to be found in the statute-book of any country : "Well aware that Almighty God has created the mind free,-that all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burdens, or civil incapacitations, tend only to beget hypocrisy, and are a departure from the plan of the Holy Author of our religion, who being Lord of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercion on either; that the impious presumption of legislators and rulers, civil and ecclesiastical (who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking, as alone true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them upon others), hath established and maintained false religions over the greater part of the world, and through all time;-that to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of opinions which he disbelieves, is sinful and tyrannical;—that even the forcing a man to support this or that teacher of his own religious persuasion, is depriving him of the comfortable liberty of giving his contributions to the particular pastor, whose morals he would make his pattern, and whose powers he feels most persuasive to righteousness, and withdrawing from the ministry those temporal rewards, which, proceeding from an approbation of their personal conduct, are an additional incitement to earnest and unremitted labours for the instruction of mankind;—that our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions, more than on our opinions in physics or in geometry;-that, therefore, the proscribing any citizen as unworthy of the public confidence, by laying upon him an incapacity, of being called to offices of trust and emolument, unless he profess to renounce this or that religious opinion, is depriving him, injuriously, of those privileges and advantages, to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right, and tends also to corrupt the principles of that very religion, it is meant to encourage, by bribing with a monopoly of worldly honours and emoluments, those who will externally conform to it ;-that though indeed those are criminal who do not withstand such temptations, yet neither are those innocent who lay them in their way;—that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion, and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on a supposition of their ill tendency, is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being, of course, judge of that tendency, will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall agree with or differ from his own ;-that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government, for its officers to interpose, when principles break out in overt acts, against peace and good order;-and, finally, that truth is great, and will prevail if left to herself,—is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and can have nothing to fear from the conflict, unless (by human interposition), disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate,-errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them. "Be it therefore enacted by the General Assembly, That no man shall be compelled to support any religious worship, place or minister, whatsoever, nor shall be forced, restrained, molested, or burdened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain, their opinion, in matters of religion ;—and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities. "And though we well know that this Assembly, elected by the people for the ordinary purposes of legislation only, have no power to restrain the acts of succeeding Assemblies, constituted with powers equal to our own; and that, therefore, to declare this act irrevocable, would be of no effect in law; yet we are free to declare, and do declare, that the rights hereby asserted are natural rights of mankind; and that if any act shall be hereafter passed to repeal the present, or to narrow its operation, such act will be an infringement of natural rights."-A Collection of Testimonies in favour of Religious Liberty, pp. 87, 88. 8vo. Lond. 1790. NOTE III. THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH NOT SELF-SUPPORTED. "It is said that in our own country, the individual citizen does not pay the ministers of the state religion. I am glad that this seeming paradox is advanced, because it indicates that those who advance it confess that to make them pay would be wrong. Why else should they deny it? It is said, then, that persons who pay tithes, do not pay the established clergy; that tithes are properly held as a person holds an estate; that if tithes were taken off, rents would advance to the same amount; that the buyer of an estate pays so much the less for it, because it is subject to tithes, and therefore that neither owner nor occupier pay any thing. This is specious, but only specious. The landholder pays the clergyman, just as he pays the tax-gatherer. If taxes were taken off, rents would advance just as much, as if tithes were taken off; and a person may as well say, that he does not pay taxes, as that he does not pay tithes. The simple fact is, that an order of clergy are, in this respect, in the same situation as the body of stockholders who live on their dividends. They are supported by the country. The people pay the stockholder in the form of taxes, and the clergyman in the form of tithes. Suppose every clergyman were to leave the country to-morrow, and to cease to derive any income from it, it is manifest that the income they now derive would be divided among those who remain,—that is, that those who now pay would cease to pay. Rent, and taxes, and tithes, are, in these re K k |